Another development from the wonderful world of product dis-placement: Abercrombie & Fitch doesn’t want its brand associated with Jersey Shore’s The Situation. From WSJ’s Speakeasy blog:

Teen apparel retailer Abercrombie & Fitch Co. is offering to pay Michael “The Situation” Sorrentino not to wear its merchandise. The New Albany, Ohio company released a statement Tuesday evening titled “A Win-Win Situation,” in which it stated a “deep concern” over the association between Mr. Sorrentino and the brand. A&F offered up a “substantial payment” to Mr. Sorrentino “to wear an alternate brand.”

Ironic, certainly, given that “Abercrombie was apparently selling a T-shirt with the words ‘The Fitchuation’ on it last summer” (see Adweek). But not the first time a brand has used an anti-endorsement from The Situation in hopes that a double-negative is actually a positive (see Miracle Whip). And also not the first time the cast of Jersey Shore has been targeted by brands who want the opposite of product placement (see Coach sends Snooki a Gucci bag).

What a fabulous, hilarious new line of work: Make yourself famous for all the wrong reasons, and you can parlay your widespread unpopularity into a tidy income.

Is the hope that most people don’t like Jersey Shore’s Pauly D, and since he doesn’t like Miracle Whip, maybe we will — just to be un-Pauly-D-like?

(Remember when Coach sent Snooki a Gucci bag, so she’d stop carrying around one of theirs? But that can’t be the explanation here. Hellmann’s would get a call really, really fast from Kraft lawyers if they created spoof Miracle Whip ad and ran it on TV.)

I saw some research back in January that suggests celebrity spokespeople don’t make ads more effective. While I have not seen research to support the following, I can’t imagine celebrity spokespeople from the cast of Jersey Shore are good for anyone’s brand.